As illustrated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the recent revival of nationalism has triggered a threatening return of revisionist conflict. While the literature on nationalism shows how nationalist narratives are socially constructed, much less is known about their real-world consequences. Taking nationalist narratives seriously, we study how past “golden ages” affect territorial claims and conflict in post-Napoleonic Europe. We expect nationalists to be more likely to mobilize and initiate conflict if they can contrast the status quo to a historical polity with supposedly greater national unity and/or independence. Using data on European state borders going back to 1100, combined with spatial data covering ethnic settlement areas during the past two centuries, we find that the availability of plausible golden ages increases the risk of both domestic and interstate conflict. These findings suggest that specific historical legacies make some modern nationalisms more consequential than others.

正如俄罗斯入侵乌克兰所表明的那样，最近民族主义的复兴引发了修正主义冲突的威胁卷土重来。虽然有关民族主义的文献展示了民族主义叙事是如何在社会上构建的，但对其现实世界的后果却知之甚少。我们认真对待民族主义叙事，研究过去的“黄金时代”如何影响拿破仑后欧洲的领土主张和冲突。我们预计，如果民族主义者能够将现状与据称具有更大民族团结和/或独立性的历史政体进行对比，他们就更有可能动员和发起冲突。利用可追溯至 1100 年的欧洲国家边界数据，结合过去两个世纪期间种族定居地区的空间数据，我们发现，看似合理的黄金时代的存在增加了国内和国家间冲突的风险。这些发现表明，特定的历史遗产使某些现代民族主义比其他民族主义更为重要。